Madeleine McCann's parents win €500k in damages against former police chief.

[DCI]

Pick the bones out of this

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eliphashardi.eu%2F&sandbox=1

Thanks Alfred. 84 proven facts, listed, as I said.

[Brietta]

Maybe it's because they have a lawyer representing them who complained "We can't find the money!" on Day 1 of the hearings.

Classy.

Very classy to keep on alleging something you can't provide a cite for ... a vague reference to Sky News doesn't quite do it http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6091.25;wap2

[John]

Indeed.  Whatever happened to Freedom of Speech?  In Portugal you are no longer allowed to cause Anxiety and Trauma, even if what you say is true.

It certainly looks that way Eleanor.

[Alice Purjorick]

Pick the bones out of this

https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eliphashardi.eu%2F&sandbox=1

Why?
You should now be a happy little Alfred you have the full SP so there is no need for guessing games and asking further questions is there?

[Lyall]

So she said it a propos of nothing at all, like someone with Tourettes?

I wish I'd been recording, because it was quite a performance from her. But I didn't record it and luckily for Isabel it seems nobody else did either.

[Eleanor]

The simple truth of the matter is that Amaral made accusations against The McCanns that he could not substantiate.
That is Libel.

[Lyall]

Very classy to keep on alleging something you can't provide a cite for ... a vague reference to Sky News doesn't quite do it http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6091.25;wap2

Trust me on this

[Alfred R Jones]

And there was me thinking you understood this trial and what it was really all about?

Clearly I don't so what of the defendants' rights did Amaral violate?

[Alfred R Jones]

Why?
You should now be a happy little Alfred you have the full SP so there is no need for guessing games and asking further questions is there?

Sorry, I thought you were interested in the judgment, clearly you're not, my mistake.

[Alfred R Jones]

The simple truth of the matter is that Amaral made accusations against The McCanns that he could not substantiate.
That is Libel.

Perfectly put.

[Lyall]

Thanks Alfred. 84 proven facts, listed, as I said.

Most of the 84 are just statements of what the book says, and what was said in the newspaper article etc. however. Most of the 84 were never disputed.

[John]

The simple truth of the matter is that Amaral made accusations against The McCanns that he could not substantiate.
That is Libel.

Actually no.   Libel is in essence the promotion of a malicious false statement.  Libel has not been proven!

[John]

Clearly I don't so what of the defendants' rights did Amaral violate?

Undoubtedly it will all be detailed in the judges report.

[Jean-Pierre]

Gerry McCann testimony on 8th July 2014

Libel trial McCann v Gonçalo Amaral - Day 12

www.miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=4746.0

OK John so you are using as a "cite" an amateur court report from a biased individual.  Fair enough.

However, that said, you are also taking that particular sentence out of context.  If you read the whole passage from the point where GMC says "can I make a statement" it makes it clear that the Judge means that determining the facts (e.g forensics in the car) - is the job of the experts in that field, and not the court.  The results are therefore "taken as read".

 

[Angelo222]

Don't you agree though that when their daughter is still missing such triumphalism over the award of money is a tad crass ?

Not to mention absolutely delighted!!!